Re: submitting a patch against the ALSA repos

["Adrian McMenamin" <adrianmcmenamin@gmail.com>]

On 18/05/07, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de> wrote:
> At Fri, 18 May 2007 10:16:26 +0100,
> Adrian McMenamin wrote:
> >
> > I have submitted my patch against the 2.6.21 kernel tree but I dare
> > say I need to actually submit it against the alsa repos.
>
> If you submit a patch to a new driver, it should be against the very
> latest ALSA tree, which is basically based on the latest mm tree
> (2.6.22-rc*-mm*) and planned to be merged into the next kernel
> (2.6.23).
>
> Is there any difference between 2.6.21 and 22 regarding SH arch
> specific things?  At least, there is no difference regarding the sound
> infrastructure.


None that I am aware of, I'll post a patch against that tree later
today just to be sure though.

>
> > I have a few questions:
> >
> > 1. Which set of sources do I patch - I assume alsa-driver - is that right?
>
...
>
> If the driver is still in the early development stage and not intended
> to be merged to the upstream kernel, we can keep it in alsa-driver
> tree.



Yes, I think it can go upstream.
>
...
>
> > 3. This is a new architecture - there are no other SuperH drivers in
> > alsa (afaik) - how do I add a new architecture? My memory is that when
> > I tried this a year ago it was a bit of a nightmare.
>
> Yeah, it's not too easy.  First, we'd need to add the architecture
> check and the corresponding options in configure script.
> I'll take care of it.
>


More than happy for you to do that.